5 ms·
I think this is the right spirit. C makes a lot of things undefined that could be implementation defined even on weird hardware. That would considerably reduc
by gdwatson 11y ago
I think this is the right spirit.
C makes a lot of things undefined that could be implementation defined even on weird hardware. That would considerably reduce the gap between customary C and standard C for "normal" hardware while letting the oddball machines do what they need to do and document it.
I don't know if the compiler implementors would stand for it, though.
- pcwalton 11y ago> I don't know if the compiler implementors would stand for it, though. I wouldn't without solid proof that performance won't regress.
- gdwatson 11y agoHow much? On which applications?
- pcwalton 11y agoThe applications that the compilers' customers are using. The thing that's often forgotten in these discussions is that compiler authors listen to their customers, and what they do reflects what their customers want. Compiler developers don't implement optimizations because they're scheming language lawyers looking for ways to break programs. They implement optimizations because their customers file bugs saying that a competing compiler optimized their program a certain way and wondering why all compilers don't do the same. It's instructive to go back and look at mailing list and message board discussions at the height of the GCC/LLVM/MSVC/ICC competition. The performance wars were intense.